If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you

This week, the Pacers have edged out a win in Chicago and out-classed Portland at home
to bring their record on the season above .500 for the first time since November 3. Given
how depressing this team looked over its first 10 games of the year, that is actually a big
step forward. But for a franchise that entered the season expecting to have home-court
advantage in the first round of the playoffs, this season has still been a disappointment.

One of the many things lost to this Pacer team in Danny Granger’s absence this season
has been a sense stability down the stretch in games. Pacer coach Frank Vogel and Pacer
fans knew that – with rare exception – the wing combo of Danny and Paul George would
be on the floor come the final few minutes of the fourth quarter.

This season, Vogel seems to have been experimenting with a running mate for George
late in games, choosing from a trio of Lance Stephenson, Sam Young, and Gerald Green.
Prior to Friday night’s game against Denver, Mike Wells of the Indianapolis Star asked
Frank how he made the choice.

“It’s typically, I’m goin’ with Lance, but if either Sam or Gerald are going good, I’ll
consider those guys,” said Vogel. “If there are match-up situations that are tough for
Lance, we’ll consider one of those other guys, as well.”

But what exactly is “going good?”

What makes Vogel go with Gerald Green or Sam Young over Lance Stephenson
“Sam has a knack for impacting the game in a variety of ways,” said Vogel. “Offensively,
with cuts and offensive rebounds and making the open three every now and then. Just
being a ball mover. But he has the ability to really change a game defensively and to
have special performances on the defensive end.”

Typically, in this league made for TV, production equals respect. I'm not talking about
respect from the national media, or respect from the fans, I'm talking about respect
from the refs. When you're an unknown rookie, you don't get the borderline whistles.
When you're mostly a jump shooter who rarely ventures into the lane, you don't get
the borderline whistles. When you're a finesse player who shies away from contact,
you don't get the borderline whistles. Jrue is none of those things anymore, and it's
about time he started getting the benefit of the doubt.

Here's some perspective on the team as a whole, first. The Sixers have been
outscored by 43 points so far this season. From the line, they've been outscored by
48. In the past two games, they've been outscored by 35 from the line. Two home
games, they've attempted 25 fewer free throws than the star-less Pistons and Bulls.
That's shameful.

Part of the problem is the horrendous Sixer bigs. They're pretty much all either too
slow, too weak, too dumb or some combination of the three to protect the paint.
Spencer Hawes is helpless as a weak-side defender unless the play is telegraphed
and he has three or four seconds to get himself into position. Even then, it's 50/50
whether he'll get whistled for the foul he commits. Poor interior defense is part of
the problem, but it's not the part that's most frustrating.

The NBA, at its worst, is barely better than professional wrestling. When a superstar
is in a game, the deck is stacked absurdly in their favor. If you look at LeBron the
wrong way, he's going to the line. If OKC ever goes into a scoring drought, all they
need to do is give the ball to Kevin Durant anywhere in the vicinity of the basket
and he's more likely to get a trip to the line than not. Paul Pierce's plaintive wails
lead to a handful of whistles every game when no one comes close to making
contact with him. It's sad to watch. It's something teams without superstars have
to overcome. Whether it's a mandate from the league to protect the game's stars,
human nature because those players are head and shoulders above everyone
else or a downright act of cowardice and playing favorites by the refs, it's
institutional and has been basically since Michael Jordan started scowling at the
refs, if not longer.

There aren’t a whole lot of areas, in sport or otherwise, where the opinion of the
casual observer and the studied wisdom of the experts dovetail, so it’s worth noting
that entering this season the two occasionally warring factions were in almost
perfect agreement on this point: Evan Turner’s awfulness.

The reasoning went like this: he hurt his team directly by being a poor shooter and
missing shots, then indirectly because the opposing player tasked with covering him
could, secure in the knowledge that if ET hazarded an FGA he’d likely miss it, drift
off him and into the lane; shrinking the floor and undermining scoring opportunities
for his teammates.

The things Turner did well — like being the best defensive rebounding guard of all-
time last season, for starters — were either glossed over by these critics, or
explained away as insufficient to offset the harm he did to the Sixers’ offense.
There were numbers involved in some of these arguments.

Sometime in early November though, the sentiment swung; slowly at first, then
more abruptly.

Something like a pro-Turner consensus began to emerge.

Corner 3s started dropping and glowing pieces cropped up in well-regarded
publications. Twitter became a ‘twitter with authentic affection for the Buckeye’s
idiosyncrasies; the herky-jerk handle, the occasional offensive eruptions, the
bizarre stat lines, that voice. He’s been, along with Holiday and Thad Young,
recognized as a key component of the Sixers “promising” triune core.

The snark stopped. He’s become, if not loved, liked.

I’ve been glad to see it, despite the fact that it doesn’t really make any sense.

Here’s a thought exercise. Take a gander at the per 48-minute averages of these
three players.

Though most of us, assuming they played the same position, would prefer player
one to the other two, anyone with a solid read on what these numbers mean would
agree that 1.) the difference between the three is marginal and 2.) we’re dealing
with sound, well-rounded players here.